These observations by Bailey and StevO might serve as the beginning of a conversation that will merit attention, elaboration, and debate (not to mention, of course, irritation, snark, and insult) as this season progresses.
As often as not I supported Palfy’s and pete0’s criticism of Gana Gueye when he played for us before. For me, it came down to the IGG “risk/reward” calculation, and rather too many of what Bailey here refers to “swings and roundabouts.” Perhaps StevO’s question — genuine, I gather, given the emogi — is a key, about which we will learn more as Lampard’s tactics emerge.
I will hope that those tactics will hinge on Gana Gueye being deployed, as Bailey describes his play yesterday, to sit, hold, pick off, and knock the ball around. I think Gana Gueye is way, way best deployed as a holding DCM, not as a box-to-box midfielder. He’s just not much good, skill-wise, near the opponent’s box; worse, he’s dangerously away from his great defensive positional-strength there. None of our other 6 midfielders can compare to his brilliance as a holding DCM. But most, perhaps all of the other 6, offer more in attack. Iwobi, Onana, and Doucouré are certainly better than IGG going forward, Davies and Garner probably so; even the rarely-to-be-seen-again Allan has a “better” shot than IGG.
Gana Gueye can be our most valuable player, our fulcrum, (1) in protecting the back 4, and (2) in freeing our 5 attacking players to push forward, press, attack, cross, score goals. Happy for him — Bailey again — to pick off, win the ball, and set us on the attack. But he should rarely continue to attack; leave that to actual ACMs, wingers, and forwards, which, to our delight and surprise, are now in the squad in pretty good numbers.